Colonies in negotiation limbo: falklands and Gibraltar in comparative perspective

Abstract

As a result of General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), the decolonization of a substantial part of the globe began. With a few exceptions, today that process has been successfully completed. The Malvinas and Gibraltar are part of that small number of cases pending decolonization. However, the Assembly has been treating these two cases in a different and ambiguous way. This has mainly generated two interpretations among the doctrine: for some these cases must also be solved in the most traditional way; that is, with a selfdetermination referendum of the respective peoples. For others, however, the end of colonialism involves the negotiated reintegration of those occupied territories to their respective original States. The objective of this text is to argue that a third possibility arises from the different Resolutions of the Assembly and the Council in these and other related cases, which we describe as “legal limbo”: since neither of the two previous principles is applicable, the parties involved must negotiate to reach an agreement. To reach such a conclusion, we will review the main milestones of both disputes and examine the arguments of both doctrinal sectors through a comparative analysis.